Hanley to tha Dodgers

[HPC]

Not really. There is a huge difference between a player with Bradley's track record, and a player like Hanley who has developed a reputation but there's little hard information to back it. Time might change that, but to this point it's a ridiculous comparison.

We're not comparing Hanley Ramirez and Milton Bradley as player's.

We're saying that people said for both that "a change of scenery will reignite his flair and get him back to what he should be doing" and for Milton, people just kept saying it until they ran out of breath. Time will tell for Hanley.

 

[aarne13]

I'm not sure why people are even qualifying the trade in regards to "if he returns to form". Even if he continues to bat .246 the rest of the season, that is still an upgrade at third compared to Uribe's .190 BA. Most GM's would jump at the chance to upgrade any spot by 56 points in BA and improved power stats as a bonus. I'm not a HanRam expert but I have to believe he's a defensive upgrade over Uribe as well. Since he can play SS or 3rd, his defensive flexability is valuable as well. Personally... as a Dodgers fan... I love the trade

I guess compared to Uribe, anything is an upgrade offensively. yikes. Defensive flexibility assumes that the player can adequately play each position. With Hanley it just means that he has played several positions poorly. -9.1 UZR/150 at SS and -11.2 UZR/150 at 3B. Magically, it seems that Uribe has held his own, 10.2 @ 2B, 10.1 @ 3B and 3.2 UZR/150 at SS. I guess if you can ignore the $35MM it is a decent trade.

 

[Topnotchsy]

We're not comparing Hanley Ramirez and Milton Bradley as player's.

We're saying that people said for both that "a change of scenery will reignite his flair and get him back to what he should be doing" and for Milton, people just kept saying it until they ran out of breath. Time will tell for Hanley.

I was not referring to on the field, I was referring to the fact that there was a lot more publicly said about Milton than there had been about Hanley, so I'll give it more time before assuming he will follow a similar path...

 

[Mudcatsfan]

I was not referring to on the field, I was referring to the fact that there was a lot more publicly said about Milton than there had been about Hanley, so I'll give it more time before assuming he will follow a similar path...

Bradley's also a much older player.

It's the same as asking if a player is on track for a HOF career. Obviously at this point you can't say Hanley was a hall of famer, nor can you say he was Milton Bradley.

Let's say Hanley's on track for a Bradley-esque reputation.

 

[Tom Oates]

We're Dodger fans... we are used to eating bad contracts... See Andruw Jones, Jason Schmidt, JD Drew, Manny, etc.

You are clearly far more knowledgable than I when it comes to defensive stats. I had to google UZR just to follow what you were referencing Do the Uribe UZR that you quoted contain a sufficient number of innings at these positions to be reliable? From what I read, small sample sizes may taint the calculations.

In case there is anyone else who is equally UZR challenged... I found this good explaination...

http://www.fangraphs.com/library/index.php/defense/uzr/

Enjoy!
Tom

 

[FromKoufaxtoEdwin]

We're Dodger fans... we are used to eating bad contracts... See Andruw Jones, Jason Schmidt, JD Drew, Manny, etc.

You are clearly far more knowledgable than I when it comes to defensive stats. I had to google UZR just to follow what you were referencing Do the Uribe UZR that you quoted contain a sufficient number of innings at these positions to be reliable? From what I read, small sample sizes may taint the calculations.

In case there is anyone else who is equally UZR challenged... I found this good explaination...

http://www.fangraphs.com/library/index.php/defense/uzr/

Enjoy!
Tom

Uribe is and has always been a really good defender, both from defensive metrics and from my eye test. He looks pudgy and out of shape, but he has a tremendously quick first step and a strong, accurate arm. Unfortunately, he is a disaster at the plate.

As for the deal, it is a must make for the Dodgers. We have multiple pitching prospects I prefer to Eovaldi, and you cannot pass up taking a flyer on Hanley. Even now he is a huge upgrade at either SS or 3B, but if he can come close to regaining what he had before, it is will a franchise changing move. Offensive options at SS and 3B are slim on the market and the Dodgers have nothing coming up in the system. I am far from a Colletti fan, but this is a tremendous move.

To Florida fans, Eovaldi is a decent piece. He has a odd delivery, but can rush it up to 97 and sits at 93-95. His fastball also has some nice movement to it, and isnt a flat 4 seamer. With that kind of fastball, one would expect much higher strikeout numbers, but his offspeed stuff lags FAR behind his fastball. His slider can occasionally be an out pitch, but is extremely inconsistent and ineffective at times. His curveball is what a call a "high school curve," as it is one of those loopy offerings, with no sharp break to it. He rarely throws a changeup, and when he does, you realize why he doesnt throw it often. If he doesnt improve his offspeed stuff, hell be a nice 4-5 piece (which I expect). If he can improve the offspeed stuff (very hard to do), he can be more. Either way, its a ni-brainer to give him up for Hanley.

 

[markakis8]

I think he would've had an inside the parker if he wasn't watching that ball to see if it went out. That would've been something...1st at bat with a new team and you hit an inside the park HR